The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-08-07

voters throughout the state, who
shall assemble and vote" aud in
New Hampshire, 1884, first appears
the principle of direct vote OF the
people upon the amendments, and it
requires that at the end OF seven
years convention should be elected,
but its amendments were to DO laid
before the towns and unincorporated
places and approved by thirds
of the qualified voters present, and
voting upon the question:
In the decade next succeeding the
Revolution, comes first Kentucky,
with the constitution OF 1892, where
in the DISPUTED words Of our Tonnes
see constitution first appear, though
it's prototype is evidently found in
the Massachusetts, constitution OF
1850. There is an important differ
ence, however, which calls for a
change of phraseology, and which is
one that more or less affects all sub
sequent constitutions fashioned at
ter these two leading medels. By
that of Massac husetts the election
was held for the purpose of collect
ing their sentiments" on the neces-
sity Of revision-that is to say, by .
direct aud single vote upon the call
of convention and none other, and
the body Of electors designated to
decide was only those qualified vot-
ers" who should" assemble and vote"
while, by that of Kentucky, the
election for the convention was to
be lat a general election" by she
persons qualified to vote for repre-
sentatives," and the direction to
the body of electors designated
was that they should vote
also, by ballot, for or against a
convention" and the require
ment was that it should sp.
pear that a majority OF all the oiti-
Gems in the State, voting for repre-
sentstives, have voted for a conven-
ton" Thus it is seen that the time
and character Of the elections we're
different, though the object was iden-
teal, and the body of electors de.
ssribed was, in each State, essential
ly distinct, though possessing tho
same qualifications, DO doubt and
yet, no blunder was made, and the
two instruments are wholly unam-
biguous and plainly expressive Of the
intent. Next, and almost simulta.
neously, came Delaware, 1892, with
two modes Of amending, one pattern
ed after South Carolina, 1890, By leg
islative act subsequently ratified by
a newly elected Legislature, and the
other by the call Of convention at
"a general election for representa-
tives," at which they were t0 vote,
also, for or against convention, "
and il it shall appear that "a majori-
ty OF all citizens in the State, having
right to vote for representatives,
have voted for q convention, etc.
Here the chronological continuity
must be broken to explain that this
constitution makes no provision for
ascertaininQ whether any given vote
would be "a majority OF all citizens
in the State, having right TO vote for
representatives" aud this was a very
important omission, for, evidently,
the largest possible body of electors
was designated, II we assume, as We
must, that those eleetiug representa-.
tives constitute. generally, the larg.
est electoral body Of the State. There
was a convention called Under this
constitution but, at present, / am
not informed how il wal
made 10 appear that il
received the required majority
Nor has any examination beer
made, as yet, for any judicial con
sideration OF that omission, il an
there be; but il may be suggested
that, possibly, il could be held tina
the legislature had power TO proyid,
by law for the ascertainment of tn,
fact, under its general power TO Civ,
! effect to the constitution, but, posi-
bly,, also, that this must be done b!
laws passed before the vote is takeI
and not afterward. since the highes
wisdom II not the dislike Of the lav
for retroactive legislation woul,
require that course. However thi
be, subsequently,, Delaware, 1881
corrected this omission by conven
ton amendment which provides tina
the electoral body shall be asccr
tanned by reference TO the highcs
number OF votes cast in the State a
any one OF the thiee general cleo
tons next proceeding the day OF yo,
ing for n convention, except whe
they may be less than the Who'll
number OF votes voted both for an
against a convention, in which cas-
the said majority shall be ascertaine
by reference TO the number OF vote
given on the day Of voting for @
against convention" This
peculiar, aud the question arise
whether the legislature, in th
absence Of this amendment to th
constitution, could make an identic.
or analogous provision; whethC
there be any distinction between th
legislative power % take a census q
count, 10 some way designated by a
act Of the legislature, OF "all the cid
Eens 10 the State. having right
vote for representatives" in reiol
onee to its bearing upon any give
vote, and the power TO make sue
rules OF evidence as those containc
in this Delaware amendment Of 1881
aud, whether In the absence oil bot
constitutional and legislative pr,
visions such A. these, the court
could manufacture them under ii
power 10 construe or artificially int
pref the words used2
Next, and again almost simulii
neously come New Hampshire, l19
which requires an election for a COT
yention at the expiration Of sevt
years, at the FIRST annual meetit
for the choice OF senator's" and III
majority OF the qualified voters
the State, present aud voting at u
said meeting" are in favor OF IL q
legislature shall call the oonventio
! and the alterations made are ITO
= laid before the towns, etc, and a
proved "by two-thirds Of the quail
! 6ed voters present and voting on q
. subject"